Chemical Exposures Associated with Clandestine Methamphetamine Laboratories
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chemical Exposures Associated with Clandestine Methamphetamine Laboratories By John W. Martyny, Ph.D., CIH Associate Professor, National Jewish Medical and Research Center Shawn L. Arbuckle Industrial Hygiene Program Coordinator, National Jewish Medical and Research Center Charles S. McCammon, Jr., Ph.D., CIH Senior Industrial Hygienist, Tri-County Health Department Eric J. Esswein, MSPH, CIH, CIAQP Senior Industrial Hygienist, National Institute For Occupational Safety and Health Nicola Erb Epidemiologist, National Jewish Medical and Research Center Acknowledgements: This project was sponsored, in part, by a grant from the Colorado Department of Public Safety and the United States Department of Justice through the Colorado Methamphetamine Program. In addition, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health provided a substantial amount of the laboratory analysis. The North Metro Task Force allowed us to sample at a number of their clandestine laboratory investigations and assisted in the Colorado Springs Police Department Sampling and the controlled manufacturing sampling. The Tri-County Health Department provided personnel and assistance during the sampling efforts and the Denver Police Department and Trinidad Police Department allowed us to conduct sampling at suspected methamphetamine laboratories within their jurisdictions. The Colorado Springs Police Department allowed us to conduct sampling during a controlled methamphetamine manufacture in their crime laboratory enabling us to test our sampling methodologies and to determine maximum chemical concentrations. Assistance was also provided by the Colorado Alliance for Drug Endangered Children and many of the emergency service agencies (police, fire, and EMS) in the Denver Metropolitan Area. The project personnel also wish to thank Lt. Lori Moriarty, Sgt. Jim Gerhardt, and Lynn Riemer for their help throughout the study. 2 Table of Contents Introduction . 5 Project Methodology . 7 Laboratory Methods . 7 Sampling Scenarios . 8 Questionnaires . 10 Data Collection . 10 Project Results . 10 Current Standards for Sampled Compounds . 10 Clandestine Laboratories Sampled . 11 Colorado Springs Police Department Results . 13 Inorganic Acid Scan Results . 13 Phosphine Sampling Results . 14 Iodine Sampling Results . 15 Total Hydrocarbon Results . 15 Methamphetamine Wipe Sample Results . 16 Drug Laboratory Response Results . 16 Acid Scan Results . 17 Phosphine Sampling Results . 17 Iodine Sampling Results . 17 Total Hydrocarbon Results . 18 Methamphetamine Wipe Sample Results . 19 Results of a Controlled Methamphetamine Cook in a House 21 Red Phosphorous Method Results . 22 Hypophosphorous Method Results . 23 Hydrogen Chloride Results During Salting Out . 24 Methamphetamine Wipe Sample Results . 24 Results of a Controlled Methamphetamine Cook in a Motel 26 Chemical Results . 27 Salting/Filtering Phase Chemical Results . 28 Methamphetamine Wipe Sample Results . 29 Methamphetamine Sample Results using Cozart and Sabre 2000 Instruments . 30 Methamphetamine Wipe Samples on PPE . 31 Methamphetamine Results of Carpet Samples . 33 Airborne Methamphetamine Results . 34 Clothing Sample Results for Methamphetamine . 34 Questionnaire Results . 34 Project Discussion . 35 Chemical Exposures Associated with Meth Labs . 36 Phosphine . 36 Iodine . 37 Hydrogen Chloride . 38 Methamphetamine Exposures . 39 3 Suggested Personal Protective Equip. Requirements . 39 Questionnaire Discussion . 40 Study Conclusions . 41 Study Limitations . 43 References . 44 4 Introduction: The State of Colorado as well as the nation face an unprecedented epidemic of clandestine methamphetamine drug manufacturing. Seizures of methamphetamine drug laboratories continue to rise putting police and fire first responders at risk for a variety of hazards. The number of seizures in Colorado has risen dramatically from 31 laboratories in 1998 to 455 laboratories in 2001. First responders and susceptible third parties, such as children, are at risk for exposures to the chemical hazards and the fire, explosion, and safety hazards inherent with clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine. Unfortunately, very little is known regarding the specific exposure hazards faced by first responders and bystanders associated with illegal methamphetamine manufacture and lab seizure. As a result there is very poor information on which to establish appropriate medical treatment plans and healthcare providers are forced to provide generic, often expensive, and probably to some extent unnecessary medical testing. The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) by emergency services and law enforcement personnel also vary widely by jurisdiction due to the lack of information regarding chemical exposures at the sites and the necessity for protection. Some jurisdictions use self-contained breathing apparatus and chemical-protective suits while other neighboring jurisdictions use no respiratory protection or chemical-protective suits at all. Other agencies switch from self-contained breathing apparatus to air-purifying respirators after the initial assessment while other agencies remain in the highest levels of protection. These variations are due to a lack of information from scientifically-based studies, relating to exposure risks while conducting these operations. Even though many agencies use some form of PPE, there are increasing reports of emergency service and law enforcement personnel being injured while conducting investigations at clandestine methamphetamine laboratories. The Centers for Disease Control reported 59 events associated with methamphetamine labs where emergency services personnel were injured during the investigation between 1996 and 1999. The number of injured responders was 155 with most reporting respiratory irritation.(1) Studies conducted by Dr. Jefferey Burgess(2,3) at the University of Washington investigated the symptoms reported by emergency responders during illegal methamphetamine laboratory seizures. Responders predominately reported general irritant symptoms, but least one case of phosphine gas exposure was reported. In a questionnaire study of emergency responders, 53.8% reported at least one illness while conducting laboratory seizures with most symptoms appearing to be related to chemical exposure at the laboratory site. The primary symptoms reported were headache and mucous membrane irritation. Although the predominant symptoms were irritant symptoms, a number of responders were found to have an accelerated drop in one second forced expiratory volume (FEV1) that may have been related to work in drug laboratories. The majority of symptoms reported by officers occurred during the processing phase of the laboratory seizures but 5 this phase was also the phase in which the most time was spent in the laboratory area. The use of respiratory protection did seem to reduce the incidence of symptoms while investigating these laboratories. There has also been anecdotal evidence of exposure to methamphetamine causing permanent lung damage but the actual cases have not been reported in the literature. This increase in illegal laboratory seizures and reported health effects has resulted in health concerns by the emergency services and law enforcement personnel responding to these incidents. Typical concerns expressed by first responders regarding exposures at clandestine methamphetamine laboratory seizures include: • Was I exposed to something that can harm me? • Could my exposures cause me health concerns? • What personal protective equipment should I have been wearing during the lab seizure? • When was it safe for me to remove my personal protective equipment? Although the chemicals used in the production of methamphetamine are well known, first responders do not know which of these chemicals by themselves or in combination may be harmful and what routes of exposure present the most severe risks. Industrial hygienists commonly approach such problems by quantifying the actual exposures using air sampling, modeling, and in some cases teamed with occupational environmental medical specialists using biological markers (chemical traces in urine or blood, for example) to determine what the exposure has been. Major exposure assessment issues include individual chemical characteristics as well as potentially complex interactions of chemicals that might result in unusual and potentially very toxic mixtures. This project was designed to determine the potential chemical exposures to law enforcement and emergency services personnel responding to clandestine methamphetamine laboratory seizures. The results of the project would be utilized to inform decisions regarding PPE, containment, and medical treatment of individuals involved with these responses. The six goals of the study were to: • Determine the primary chemical exposures of concern at clandestine drug laboratory seizures for both the responders and the children present at the laboratory site. • Determine which phase of the response poses the highest risk for responders, what chemicals responders are exposed to, and to what concentrations they are exposed. • Investigate the relationship between symptoms reported by the responders and the actual exposures measured at the site. 6 • Investigate how symptoms observed or reported in children that are present in clandestine drug laboratories, relate to the chemical exposures within the laboratory. • Determine the appropriate types of personal protective equipment required for the various phases of drug lab seizures based on